>From what I can follow of this conversation I think what Bill needs is a
bunch of mbeans to be initialised before any of them are started i.e.
        mbean1.init();
        mbean2.init();
        mbean3.init();

        mbean1.start();
        mbean2.start();
        mbean3.start();

as opposed to 
        mbean1.init();
        mbean1.start();

        mbean2.init();
        mbean2.start();

        mbean3.init();
        mbean3.start();

and as long as he has a way to do this (using postRegister to call init or
whatever) he will be happy.

AFAICS then the questions are

1) Can we do this for him?  if yes then great.

2) Is this absolutely neccessary or is there some fancy way he could keep
track of things and work around his problem? if yes then ok (except maybe
for whoever has to implement the fancy bit).  I think however the answer to
this may be no because it sounds like the HAPartition has to exist (i.e. be
initialised) first and then have other mbeans register with it before it is
then started, and the other mbeans can't be started until HAPartition is
started, is this correct?

If no to both of the above then we have a problem with David J's new
deployment stuff...

Cheers
David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Jencks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 11:48 AM
> To: Bill Burke
> Cc: Andreas Schaefer; David Jencks; Sacha Labourey;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] RE: Deployment exception on Clustering
> 
> 
> To do this, subclass ServiceMbeanSupport, descend your 
> classes from this
> subclass, and override PostRegister to call your init method, after
> super.postRegister:
> 
> 
>    public void postRegister(Boolean registrationDone)
>    {
>       super.postRegister(registrationDone);
>       if (registrationDone.booleanValue())
>       {
>          init();
>       }
>    }
>    
> 
> you should probably do something similar with preUnregister(?).
> 
> IMHO you should not be making any reference to anything 
> outside the mbean
> in init. Even Rickard is viewing init as an internal 
> configuration step. 
> In this case, I can't see why you can't put the code at the 
> beginning of
> start. It might be slower (run more often), but will have the 
> same effect.
> 
> I think using explicit mbean references will result in a more 
> satisfactory
> and sturdy solution.
> 
> david jencks
> 
> On 2001.11.12 17:04:34 -0500 Bill Burke wrote:
> > Rickard talked about something called postRegister?
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andreas Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 4:50 PM
> > > To: David Jencks
> > > Cc: Sacha Labourey; 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bill Burke
> > > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] RE: Deployment exception on Clustering
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Hi David
> > > 
> > > You hear it. How can be use init() again for Clustering ?
> > > 
> > > Andy
> > > 
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Bill Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "Andreas Schaefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Cc: "Sacha Labourey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 1:10 PM
> > > Subject: [JBoss-dev] RE: Deployment exception on Clustering
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Yes this a very serious problem and it wouldn't show up 
> with your
> > Farm
> > > > stuff.  THis is my fault because I didn't document the code 
> > > very well, but
> > > > can we please switch this back?
> > > >
> > > > In the init phase, all services register with the cluster
> > (HAPartition)
> > > for
> > > > cluster events that want to listen to and also if they 
> require state
> > > > synchronization.  In the start phase, the ClusterPartition 
> > > mbean does the
> > > > final Connect to the JavaGroups message Channel.  When 
> the Connect
> > > happens,
> > > > state synchronization starts.  Services will not have 
> their state
> > > > synchronized if everything is done in the start phase.
> > > >
> > > > Bill
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Andreas Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 3:50 PM
> > > > > To: Bill Burke
> > > > > Cc: Sacha Labourey; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Deployment exception on Clustering
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Bill
> > > > >
> > > > > I added all the code from init() into start(). Is 
> this a problem ?
> > > > >
> > > > > At least when I use the Farm it works like a charm.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andy
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Bill Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > To: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
> > > "Andreas Schaefer"
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > Cc: "Sacha Labourey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 12:59 PM
> > > > > Subject: RE: Deployment exception on Clustering
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Guys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The clustering stuff is dependent on init and start 
> both being
> > > > > there.  Can
> > > > > > we put back the init?  Otherwise you break our 
> stuff.  Why are
> > you
> > > doing
> > > > > > this anyways?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bill
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: David Jencks 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > > > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 2:33 PM
> > > > > > > To: Andreas Schaefer
> > > > > > > Cc: David Jencks; Bill Burke; Sacha Labourey;
> > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Deployment exception on Clustering
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks, must have missed that one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I generally copied the init[Service] code and put it in
> > > start[Service]
> > > > > at
> > > > > > > the beginning, similarly for destroy.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As far as I could tell, everything covered by the 
> > > testsuite works as
> > > > > well
> > > > > > > after the changes as before.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please let me know of other problems.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The Service interface still has init and destroy 
> since these
> > are
> > > used
> > > > > > > heavily in the interceptor chain.  I think they are 
> > > unnecessary, but
> > > > > won't
> > > > > > > have time to try to change them for a while.  This could
> > probably
> > > > > > > be a part
> > > > > > > if turning the interceptor chains into mbeans.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > david jencks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 2001.11.12 14:13:41 -0500 Andreas Schaefer wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi David
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The ClusterPartition.java class is not started correctly
> > > > > > > > because now init() is not called anymore and therefore
> > > > > > > > the JavaGroups JChannel are not initialized.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I will go ahead and fix it but maybe there are 
> other MBeans
> > > > > > > > out there which needs attention, too.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanx
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > Andreas Schaefer
> > > > > > > > Senior Consultant
> > > > > > > > JBoss Group, LLC
> > > > > > > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Jboss-development mailing list
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> > 
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> 

_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to